add_torrent

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description goes beyond the annotations by specifying useful behaviors: torrent_file is 'read and encoded for you', download_dir 'Defaults to the session setting', and paused means 'Add without starting.' This gives the agent practical expectations about side effects and defaults beyond the idempotentHint annotation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A one-sentence purpose summary is front-loaded, followed by a compact and clearly formatted Args list. Every line adds needed information, especially given the lack of schema-level parameter descriptions.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the high parameter count, an output schema, and annotations already available, the description covers all necessary input semantics and default behaviors. Nothing essential for calling the tool correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden of explaining parameters. It does so thoroughly, covering every one of the 15 parameters with meaningful semantics like 'cookies: Cookies to send when fetching a .torrent URL' and 'bandwidth_priority: -1 low, 0 normal, 1 high.'

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The first sentence states a specific action and resource: 'Add a torrent from a magnet link, a URL, a local file or raw metainfo.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_torrent, remove_torrent, or start_torrents, so an agent can identify its purpose immediately.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description makes the use case clear: adding a new torrent through several input methods. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion conditions, but the context is unambiguous and no misleading guidance is present.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.